Edwards v. Evansville City Coach Lines, Inc.
Indiana Court of Appeals
1Opinion of the CourtKendall, J.
Appellant’s motion for new trial contends, (a) that the verdict of the jury is not sustained by sufficient evidence, and (b) that the verdict is con trary to law. Such contentions requesting a reversal require this court to consider the evidence, which evidence is not properly before the court.
Rule 2-3 of the Supreme Court provides as follows:-. Every bill of exceptions tendered prior to the filing of the transcript in the appellate tribunal shall, if correct, be signed by the judge and filed with the-clerk, which filing may be evidenced by an . order book entry or the clerk’s certificate. .…
2Cases cited5 opinions
- Walner v. CapronIndiana Supreme Court · 1946
- Pahmeier v. RogersIndiana Court of Appeals · 1936
- Radcliff v. MeishbergerIndiana Court of Appeals · 1942
- Matter of Adoption of SheeksIndiana Court of Appeals · 1976
- Kraft v. WeaverIndiana Court of Appeals · 1950
3Cited by5 opinions
- MURPHY v. HendrickIndiana Court of Appeals · 1959
- DIANE COMPANY, INC., ETC. v. BeebeIndiana Court of Appeals · 1960
- Webster v. WebsterIndiana Court of Appeals · 1962
- Annexation of Certain Territory v. City of PrincetonIndiana Court of Appeals · 1964
- Collins v. CollinsIndiana Court of Appeals · 1963